Stabilized version of the Patterson-Gimlin Bigfoot film.

Question

All the jerkiness removed. Nice stead shot. You be the judge:



Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Ziusudra.

Answer 1

That's pretty cool.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by 80 Proof.

Answer 2

Definitely a dude.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Ron Mehico.

Answer 3

Check out the soles of the feet. They look weird.

If it's a dude he's a big chested guy.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by JumperJack.

Answer 4

Guy in a fur costume, always has been always will be

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by JHB4UK.

Answer 5

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by cbpointblank1979.

Answer 6

Would have been more believable if he hadn't turned to look directly at a camera he didn't know was there.

An animal that size would have huge thigh muscles you would think. Also, don't think an animal would walk with a Reynardo Sydney gait.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by ymmot31.

Answer 7

And that the 2 tools who took the vid were known Bigfoot enthusiasts

What are the chances, the only clear video ever of the creature was captured by dudes who were trying to prove that it really existed?

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by JHB4UK.

Answer 8

Ziusudra, that's pretty cool taking the shaky out.

Didn't the guy filming admit it was fake on his deathbed or something?

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by 3 fan.

Answer 9

Touche. I wasn't quite thinking that big.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by JumperJack.

Answer 10

I had forgot about that. He also broke the news that Elton John was gay and the Hindenberg was filled with flammable gas. Wish more people were that candid.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by ymmot31.

Answer 11

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by catlanta31.

Answer 12

Bigfoot wearing boots???

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Chuckinden.

Answer 13

There was a third guy that supposedly was involved in this who claimed years afterwards that it was he in a custom which he produced and the entire thing was a hoax.

I believe there is some sort of creatures out there that generally fit the description of a big foot - but the Paterson film is to me an obvious hoax.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Deeeefense.

Answer 14

No. Just the opposite. Patterson swore on his deathbed it was real.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Ziusudra.

Answer 15

I don't know if this is real or not but I love to hear about it. From what I have seen you can see muscle definition on the creature. i one frame in particular a leg muscle bulges quite obviously. Also, the creature turns, allegedly, to look back at the two because they were moving around behind him. Not sure it had anything to do with the camera. One thing I find odd is that if they made a suit why would they go to the trouble to make it have female features like breasts? It would just make their job harder. Doesn't make sense to me. The circumstances surrounding the film are strange and lead to less credibility, but the creature is so good that I am not convinced its fake.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Comebakatz3.

Answer 16

Detailed analysis of the film from National Geographic.

Gets detailed at the 6 minute mark.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Ziusudra.

Answer 17

This why they make the "ignore" list.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by 3 fan.

Answer 18

Of all the films, pictures etc...ever shown this seems to be the best one/ if that is a suit it is a damn good one made by professionals. Sure as hell didn't buy that at a spencers. Where was this taken? Northern Cal? I've heard of Chinese military claiming to have seen Yeti's in South-Central China. If it is real that is one big ole' creature.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by post_u_up.

Answer 19

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by ymmot31.

Answer 20

Couldn't be a man in a gorilla suit, no effin way, no, you know he's real...

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by maverick1.

Answer 21

No butt crack and must be female.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by akers65.

Answer 22

If a person digs a little deeper than that you find very compelling arguments for both. Obviously everyone's first impression is that it's fake and that is perfectly understandable. Problem is when you try and prove it's fake you run into all kinds of problems with size, ambulation, leg bend angle, and all sorts of other problems that make it very hard to knock down scientifically.

The attraction for me is that although the film is obviously fake, it still stands up to the most modern of forensic computer testing. This film has been went over as much as any film outside the Zapruder film and they still have a lot of very troubling questions raised. Perhaps the greatest hoax that will ever be perpetrated. I, for one, would like to know (beyond what is already reported about who made the suit, etc.,,) how they pulled it off.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Ziusudra.

Answer 23

That's my favorite part. I hope to jesus that it's real and Mr. Foot is as chill as his walk indicates. Probably one of the realest dudes you'll never meet.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Mashburned.

Answer 24

Here's how they pulled it off.

1. Man puts on suit and walks by while another man films it.

2. the end.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by ymmot31.

Answer 25

My Bigfoot is played by Charles Barkley.

Who's inside your Bigfoot?

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Mashburned.

Answer 26

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by ymmot31.

Answer 27

Can't lineup shoulders, hips, knees, and ankles to human proportions. Size is not human. Arms are longer than human yet the fingers move. Muscles clearly ripple in the legs and back. Why did they decide to put tits on it and make it female which only made the hoax more difficult. Footprints left extrapulate to creature 7 feet tall. Same size is calculated for the creature in the film.

How did two idiots that didn't know anything about primates get all this stuff right and produce a film that to this day cannot be replicated by anyone else even using modern technology in special effects and why, despite being went over by some of the most premier labs in the country, can they not prove this thing is fake?

Got to hand it to them. Patterson was dying of cancer and indeed died 4 years after this film was made and yet managed to produce what must be considered the greatest hoax of all time.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Ziusudra.

Answer 28

Scientists have proven that the Sasquatch is real. Take a look at some plaster casts of his foot and you'll know he's real,
or just listen real close to the audiotapes, not human, no, you know he's real.



Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by maverick1.

Answer 29

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Stonewall12.

Answer 30

"Bob Heironimus claims to have been the figure depicted in the Patterson film, and his allegations are detailed in Long's book. Heironimus was a tall (6' 2), muscular Yakima, Washington, native, age 26, when he says Patterson offered him $1000 to wear an ape suit for a Bigfoot film. Bob Gimlin was on Bob Heironimus' horse, Chico, when the PGF was being filmed. Heironimus is one of numerous people who are claimed to be visible in an unreleased second reel of the film. It is unclear which if any of these claims is authentic.[citation needed]

Eventually Long uncovered testimony that corroborates Heironimus' claims: Russ Bohannon, a longtime friend, says that Heironimus revealed the hoax privately in 1968 or 1969.[55] Heironimus says he did not publicly discuss his role in the hoax because he hoped to be repaid eventually and was afraid of being convicted of fraud had he confessed. After speaking with his lawyer he was told that since he had not been paid for his involvement in the hoax that he could not be held accountable. In separate incidents, Bernard Hammermeister and Heironimus' relatives (mother Opal and nephew John Miller) claim to have seen an ape suit in Heironimus' car. The relatives say they saw the suit two days after the film was shot.[56] No date was given by Long for Hammermeister's observation, but it apparently came well after the relatives' observation, as implied by the word "still" in the justification Heironimus gave Hammermeister for requesting his silence: "There was still supposed to be a payola on this thing, and he didn't have it."[57]"

Click on the link for more details:

Link: Wiki

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Deeeefense.

Answer 31

Ziu, if you aren't just trolling, this is an even worse take than thinking Santorum is going to win the Republican nomination.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by truth_seeker.

Answer 32

blah nevermind i missed where you said it was an obvious fake.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by truth_seeker.

Answer 33

With out a doubt.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by warrior-cat.

Answer 34

Back then....probably Chuck Taylor's....

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Chump Change X.

Answer 35

If you believe any of that ish you're an absolute idiot. We found dinosaur bones from a billion years ago but haven't found any "Bigfoot" bones or any proof that it's even close to real. There are 6 billion people on Earth, yet no one can prove it's existence.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by roguemocha.

Answer 36

While your conclusion might be correct I don't think your method of getting there is sound. Just as recently as 2010 we discovered a new primate. In fact, since 2000 at least 25 new species of primate have been described, and 18 or so discovered in that time frame. So, while there are a lot of people on earth and we do discover bones, that does not mean that we aren't constantly finding new creatures, even relatively large mammals.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Comebakatz3.

Answer 37

If you run a show with proof of why its a fake and how easily they made the film, it doesnt sell. When you bring in some quack scientists to explain for half an hour on how it couldnt be created, it sells and people buy into it.

We arent scientists, so we have a tendency believe every word a person says that specializes in that department.

Dont you think its odd that with todays technology (the motion activated hunting videos, cell phones, night vision cams and satellite equipment) not a single piece of solid evidence exists?

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Throbbin_Hood.

Answer 38

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by funKYcat75.

Answer 39

I have a question. Why didn't they follow it with the camera? At that pace it would have been easy to keep up.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by fballcats76.

Answer 40

I'm not saying such a creature doesn't or at least didn't exist.

But...one would think that with all of the technology we have today...thermal imaging satellites with the ability to watch military ops in great detail, etc....that we could find one if one actually existed.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by metrueblue.

Answer 41

It's got tits.

I watched a show about this film a couple of years ago that broke it down scientifically. The did measurements of limbs and studied the gait, their conclusion was that unless it was a deformed human of great size, it was not a human.

Of course I take all those searching for bigfoot/lochness monster type shows with a grain of salt and understand that their conclusions are biased (love watching them though).

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by 80 Proof.

Answer 42

Maybe I'm being simplistic about this, but the "bigfoot" looks like he is just a human trying to walk like an ape would, if that makes sense.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by I need this.

Answer 43

I'm sure 80 believes this too.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by RUPPsRevenge1.

Answer 44

Has anyone played Undead Nightmare, the add-on to Red Dead Redemption? In one mission you hunt Sasquatch and then finally confront the last remaining Sasquatch on earth, listen to his heartfelt plea, and then have a choice to let him go or kill him. Also, the Sasquatch in RDR look similar to this one, so I say the footage is real.

This post was edited on 2/23 10:56 AM by Big Blue 1977

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Big Blue 1977.

Answer 45

I believe it was probably faked, but just to point out something simple. Look at the length of the arms compared to a humans. The arms come almost to knees. Human arms aren't that long, not even close. The proportions are definitely wrong for a human. However, However, I'm sure with some creative thinking, one could fake that for a film.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by cat_in_the_hat.

Answer 46

Anthony Davis' arms are that long.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by wildcat1973.

Answer 47

I doubt that when Davis stands straight, his arms come all the way to his knees. I've never seen a human being whose arms stop at the knee. That being said, I'm sure one could construct a costume that would extend the arms in a manner, that when viewed on grainy film, would be hard to detect.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by cat_in_the_hat.

Answer 48

If it really was bigfoot, this evidence wouldn't exist.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Stratosis.

Answer 49

Yeah, that makes sense. It just seems like the video is showing a guy who is trying his best to imitate what a bigfoot would walk like.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by I need this.

Answer 50

Exactly. Choppers flying around at night can spot anything with a heart beat in the woods, you'd be able to pick one up with no problem.

Originally posted on The Paddock - General Discussion Forum by Throbbin_Hood.